User blog:E Chip/Abram's Honeywell AGT 1500 Multifuel Engine pros and cons
The Honeywell AGT 1500 is a multifuel (meaning that it can accept multiple fuels, this one can take just about anything, maybe even ethenol) gas turbine engine developed for the UH-60 Blackhawk (lost the contract), and later adapted for the SH-60 (another loss), AH-64 (yet another loss), and the M1A2 Abrams (victory). The primary fuel used for the Abram's Honeywell AGT 1500 is JP-8, the same fuel used for the majority of US Army aircraft and vehicles for purely logistic purposes. The purpose of this post is to analyze the pros and cons of its use (with JP-8) in a tank and determine whether or not the AGT 1500 (and/or JP-8) should be removed in future tanks. 'PROS': -Tankers don't need to carry a different fuel specifically for Abrams -Can siphon fuel off any disabled US Army or USAF vehicle -Unmatched speed and acceleration a) Short range requires them to wait for tankers anyways I) Allowed quite a bit of the Republican Guard to escape the US Army in the Persian Gulf Wars -JP-8 better for cold weather than diesel (diesel waxes over) -Lighter and smaller than a diesel engine a) Larger fuel tank required, negates bonus 'CONS': -Approximately 1,000°F (535°C) exhaust a) Massive IR signature, especially vulnerable to top-attack in urban warfare and air attack I) Easily trackable by anything with an IR scope b) Armor needs to be extremely heat-resistant and have a very good cooling system to prevent heat build-up I) Also needed to prevent French crews from becoming French Fries (/endpun) II) JP-8's auto-ignition point is roughly 248F (46°C), a crack in engine heat shield=engine fire c) Infantry can't go near or on top of tank (in transport or urban warfare) I) Tank's flank and top exposed II) Tank-infantry cooperation extremely low, even with radios III) Very bad for COIN and urban warfare operations - 3 GALLONS per Mile (~7 liters per kilometer) at half-load in combat operatoins a) Performance for diesel not much better as the engine isn't optimized for diesel b) Tanks need to wait for tankers c) Range (not combat radius) of ~120 miles fully armed (~190 km) (off-road, 250 miles on perfect roads) d) Tank already very heavy - Smokers to obsucre IR and visual removed to prevent engine flame out (as opposed to use with diesel) a) Smoke grenades used instead, but less effective and less numerous -Very expensive to maintain a) 25% of all US Army maintenance budget devoted to engines, another 25% to the rest of the tank I) Unclear wheter the high maintenance of the rest of the tank is due to engine heat b) Also expensive to produce and install -Engine not optomized for any fuel, resulting in a lack of efficiency regardless of fuel when compared to other engines. So in short, there are bonuses when using the Honeywell AGT 1500:JP-8 combo in conflicts between neighboring countries with bases on borders (IE the Cold War if anything actually broke out), but it is not a solid engine for any current conflicts, nor for any future conflicts outside of areas within 100 miles of an Abrams-equipped base. The Honeywell AGT 1500 should be replaced as part of the M1A3 upgrades, and older models should be scrapped due to a lack of need. While very good for logistics, USAF and US Army should keep separate standardized fuels to maximize performance, and the US Army should use multifuel engines optomized for diesel but accepting of kerosine-based fuels (such as JT-8) for cold-weather operations. Category:Blog posts